The Panda

Boyhood and Guardians are neck and neck for my favorite of the year. I preferred Guardians just because I love its humor style, it entertained me, it even moved me at points, the soundtrack was rocking awesome, and it immersed me into a goofy satirical world. I recognize there are some flaws in different departments though, but those flaws never really effected my opinion of the movie, it's one I could watch again and again and not get tired of. Boyhood was cinematic achievement on every level, and I loved the sporadicness, and it was as close to a technically flawless movie as you are going to get. It managed to truly give you little glimpses into the this kids life as he grows up and touch on universal themes and ideas. When it comes to pure film quality Boyhood is simply one of the best movies I have ever seen period. However, I do enjoy watching Guardians more, it is one of the most entertaining movies I have seen in a long time. I personally love big blockbusters that let you sit back, get immersed, and fall into a world of laughter and adventure while also bury some nuggets of gold that are its themes buried throughout. All of my favorite cinematic elements (character driven, satirical, strong effects, sci-fi, and creative) were present in it and were delivered strongly, despite its flaws I did personally enjoy it more than Boyhood (although they really shouldn't be compared at all). It's weird, but I find one to be the better movie and the other to be the one I personally like more.

A's Boyhood Dawn of the Planet of the Apes The Grand Budapest Hotel The Guardians of the Galaxy The LEGO Movie Snowpiercer X-Men: Days of Future Past B's Bad Words Bears Captain America: The Winter Soldier Edge of Tomorrow The Fault in Our Stars The Giver Godzilla How to Train Your Dragon 2 Neighbors Next Goal Wins Noah Oculus C's About Last Night That Awkward Moment Divergent Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit Life Itself God's Not Dead The Monument's Men Muppets: Most Wanted D's 300: Rise of An Empire The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Deliver Us From Evil Endless Love Maleficent A Million Ways to Die in the West Need For Speed Non-Stop Ride Along RoboCop Transcendence F's I, Frankenstein Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones Pompeii Trans4mers: Age of Extinction Winter's Tale Z's America: Imagine a World Without Her

I saw the Giver and they really misadvertised it, I was pleasantly surprised because it was much better than I was expecting.I really do think the movie didn't go into the themes as much as it could have or have developed the ideas and characters as much as it could have. I'm also shady, I saw the play a long time ago, and I believe they changed the ending a bit but I could be wrong.It was well acted, especially by Streep and Bridges, nothing fantastic, but good performances. I did want more from it though when it ended, it really felt as if they skimmed through it and didn't take enough time to fully dwell on each moment. They wanted to cut to a lot of the more dramatic parts even though those didn't have the effect they should have had since the build up felt cut short.If they had given it 30-40 more minutes it could have been a lot stronger. It wasn't bad though, there were a lot of positive elements in it.B-

I saw the Giver and they really misadvertised it, I was pleasantly surprised because it was much better than I was expecting.I really do think the movie didn't go into the themes as much as it could have or have developed the ideas and characters as much as it could have. I'm also shady, I saw the play a long time ago, and I believe they changed the ending a bit but I could be wrong.It was well acted, especially by Streep and Bridges, nothing fantastic, but good performances. I did want more from it though when it ended, it really felt as if they skimmed through it and didn't take enough time to fully dwell on each moment. They wanted to cut to a lot of the more dramatic parts even though those didn't have the effect they should have had since the build up felt cut short.If they had given it 30-40 more minutes it could have been a lot stronger. It wasn't bad though, there were a lot of positive elements in it.B-

I think guardians and turtles should start having much slower drops until Maze Runner. I could see a 30% drop for guardians next week and a sub 50 for turtles. Then good increases for both Labor Day.However, I think If I stay can get over 20m, social media buzz is good enough.

I think the Maze Runner has potential to take the September opening weekend record, mid fourties is accessible.

I figure the break even rule with just production costs works because home video and tv rights will likely cover marketing. (As well as merchandising)One of the reasons big animated movies are so profitable, they sell lots of toys.

When I think of music, there are artists that I don't personally like but I'm able to appreciate what they do and recognize they are good at it, it just doesn't appeal to me.Just because I personally dislike the emigre genre of metal doesn't mean I can't recognize many of those metal musicians are great musicians.

I just think there's a big difference between, "I like it," and, "I think it's good/well-made".Because I have liked movies I thought were badly made and disliked movies I thought were well-made.

But isn't something well-made inherently good?

Then take Shakespeare for example (yes I know a cliche writer to choose), there are many people who don't like Shakespearean plays but you'd be a fool to think they're bad.That's because anyone with half a brain can tell he's an excellent playwriter even if you don't necessarily like to read them.

Films have specific purposes, it was a rough example yes, but the director and producers have a purpose for the film (one to make money but an artistic one as well).Guardians of the Galaxy had the purpose to entertain the audience as a comedic portrayal of Marvel's cosmic universe. It succeeded in that goal with flying colors, it may have had a few flaws but they didn't hinder it from completing its intention, so a good movie. That doesn't mean you can't dislike it, but nobody can really deny that it didn't complete that goal with the vast majority of its audiences and critics.

I was, I was making a comparison,Life Itself was a movie that really didn't appeal to me but I could tell as a documentary it was well-made and informative in form, I just personally didn't care about what it was informing me about. However there are many Ebert fans who do and would greatly appreciate it (much more than me) so I'd recommend it to them. Kind of like how a tampon isn't a product useful to me, yet it's still an overall useful product.

You're allowed to think what you want, they're your thoughts. And RT is by no means perfect, but overall you can tell distinct differences between films with rotten ratings and films with high fresh ratings.

Obviously you can never come upon a fact when it comes to this like you can with science. But that doesn't mean objectivity is impossible.For example, I am a male thus I have no uses for tampons, but I recognize they are a very good and valuable product even though I personally have no use for them.

I'm not trying to be pretentious but there is a difference between preference and objective quality. Guardians isn't better than Boyhood because of countless reasons, mostly that Boyhood is one of the few truly flawless films I have ever seen. Guardians has flaws, but I was able to ignore them because everything else worked splendidly.Guardians was overall more fun, and I personally enjoyed it more. But I would defend Boyhood as the better movie because it's profound, universally relateable and appealing, more ambitious, more intelligent, better performances, and something that has never been done before.The films really aren't comparable anyways, they strive for different goals. But there's a difference between favorite and best. (Such as I would put Starship Troopers among my favorites but nowhere near among cinemas best)

It's not hard to determine if a performance or a films cinematography is good. Each movie is supposed to be judged on its own, and there is a difference between me liking a movie and determining if a movie is good.For example, I don't necessarily like all of the movies that are certified fresh, but for the most part they are good films because otherwise you wouldn't have been able to get a 75%+ consensus that the movie was good. Not saying RT is the end all be all of determining a films objective quality, but it's the best way to do it without saying "my opinions right and yours is wrong."

Partially, but some people have bad opinions. You can objectively say a movie is good and also say it just doesn't fit your taste.Kind of like how Life itself was a well-made documentary, except unless you were a fan of Roger Ebert it came across as boring and pointless.I've also liked/been entertained by a movie more than another but still acknowledged the movie I liked more wasn't as good as the one i didn't like more. (For example boyhood is my second favorite of the year to GOTG but I wholeheartedly recognize Boyhood is the better movie)

What makes a movie good or bad depends on what the movie is, what it is aiming to do, and how well it succeeds at its (artistic) goals.There are basic things such as actors/actresses performances, cinematography, script, etc that all come into play. But you can't really make a checklist on what makes a good movie because that depends from film to film.

That's also true (to an extent for Guardians, that's playing really well with all ages), it doesn't change the fact that the kids aren't easy to please.If they like bad movies aimed at them, they'll surely like the good ones as well.

It's not hard to grasp that kids love TMNT, I mean they're what propelled shit like Maleficent to success this summer.Kids inherently have poor tastes in movies, they care more about masses of color moving quickly on the screen with simple fart based humor. It's really not hard to make a movie that'll please a kid.

74 Rocky This is Stallone's biggest success story, it is a movie that took off as a major hit, won best picture, and started one of the biggest movie franchises that is out there. There is so much cultural relevance in this and it's evident by the underdog impact it bestowed in many other movies that strived to be like that. It has worn the test of time and stands a definitive blockbuster classic.

Yeah, it also doesn't help that Mel Gibson hasn't been in a hit since he went nuts.

How is it not getting mixed WoM with these daily drops? They have been very underwhelming for a family centered movie in the summer.